Many people getting upset at this! And Ronan doesn’t help himself by insinuating climate protesters are all middle class (though that is undeniably base of green direct action).

But realistically there should be a culture of debate regarding tactics on the left >
My principal criticism is that most people on left either have been critical of insulate britain or open to idea that it’s not wholly positive. The idea that all and any kind of direct action is good and effective because the suffragettes did it is obviously illogical (& wrong) >
And Ronan is right about danger of turning issue where there’s 70% support for action into something like 50-50 culture war.

Sometimes effective politics is about polarisation (tax the rich, Brexit) where winning a maj of public opinion is fine. Climate change isn’t that >
Why would we want to polarise opinion when majority already agree w/ you?

What that tells me is sometimes you need different tools. Can’t always pursue same strategy. It’s a recency bias to think ‘XR was effective doing something similar, so can this’. Not necessarily, no >
It’s also case that for 30 years radical green movements in global north have seen direct action as default. And it often works. But if you think target, enemy, grievance and tactics don’t matter in success or failure - you’re wrong.

Left must be able to discuss such things.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Aaron Bastani

Aaron Bastani Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @AaronBastani

26 Oct
People can think whatever they like re censorship but seeing these, after so much support from Tory MPs & conservative journalists, is illustrative.

It’s why viewing the labour right as the ‘centre’ is to fundamentally misunderstand it. I don’t quite know what they believe in.
It’s not to ‘dunk’ on any of these people, I understand it and twitter is often about triviality and a laugh, but I do honestly think a big part of the Labour right is more reactionary than actual Tories on quite a few things. Why? >
Principally it’s because, in my view, conservatives don’t claim to necessarily believe in social & economic justice so take civil & political rights somewhat seriously. The Labour right doesn’t. That’s also why it isn’t especially good on due process or anything involving rules.
Read 4 tweets
25 Oct
“Glasgow University accused of undermining academic freedom in 'antisemitic' ruling”.

This is absolutely outrageous, not least because the article in question was rigorous and analytical. Solidarity with Jane Jackman. Academic freedom matters. scotsman.com/education/glas…
The article in question is here, decide for yourself.

The grim reality is that British universities are increasingly more concerned about media risk management than open and critical inquiry. The same applies with IHRA fundamentalism.

gla.ac.uk/media/Media_79…
“this article employs some discursive strategies, including a biased selection of sources as well as the misrepresentation of data, which promote an unfounded antisemitic theory regarding the State of Israel and its activity in the United Kingdom.” Just extraordinary.
Read 4 tweets
2 Oct
This is right from Cummings (for wrong reasons).

We have 2 parties fixated with defending permanent bureaucracy of state because the system blocks heterodoxy. Britain will be stuck with ineffective government until it changes its electoral system or parties have primaries (1/2)
European elections with PR somewhat broke that (allowing UKIP through), as does regionally concentrated votes under FPTP (Ireland a century ago, Scotland today). But entire set up is undemocratic, when that cracks (see Corbyn) establishment goes nuts because it’s a malfunction.
This system means problem solving & offering novel ideas is actively avoided and incentivised against both individually & collectively 🤯

The means by which body politic & society can reinvigorate itself doesn’t exist. Does Biden go left happen without primaries? Arguably no.
Read 5 tweets
30 Sep
Fair play to Paul for getting the New Statesman to publish what reads like a confused diary about the consequences of his own actions.

I don’t think there’s a single paragraph I agree with here! newstatesman.com/comment/2021/0…
This is patent nonsense. The big dividing lines in Brighton were (eventually) on party democracy, public ownership and a £15 minimum wage. There’s consensus on climate policy and individual rights among members - as anyone who speaks to them knows… Image
A politics of ‘denunciation’ is calling everyone you disagree w/ a ‘Stalinist’. Members can disagree with strategic insights of McDonnell or whoever else. That’s point of mass party. Image
Read 5 tweets
21 Sep
The Tories switching all English elections to FPTP mirrors Starmer's moves to consolidate power among MPs & away from members.

Both are about strengthening cartelisation of power at Westminster & ensuring no alternative emerges. The experiments of last decade can't be repeated>
For Tories that means ensuring another UKIP - where a party to their right emerges because of PR - is impossible. For Labour it means shutting out members.

NOBODY other than politicians thinks more power should be at Westminster. England needs a democratic revolution>
I favour primaries within parties, like US. To illustrate how archaic our 19th C political & media class is, this is described as 'Stalinist'.

I also favour PR so legislatures reflect vote. The raison d'etre of both Tory & now Lab leaderships is to take power not distribute it.
Read 4 tweets
10 Sep
Really remarkable that the Scottish Greens not adopting the IHRA definition would discount them from being able to form a government in a democracy.

I think that is quite 'extremist'. I don't think people realise how dangerous a path this is.
The idea that certain political parties could be excluded from government on the basis of not adhering to a certain set of guidelines or definitions is remarkable. It's post-democratic liberalism in its clearest form - one for political theorists to think about!
I think its outlandish this is conceivable in a democracy. Sadly it was given too much truck by Labour left, who frequently placed short term media management over right thing. That will have long term consequences for any sensible debate on this stuff
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(